Florist Sued for Refusing Service to Gay Couple Pens Defiant Letter Rejecting Gov’t Settlement Offer

[Uncensored2008]

So- what about an anti-Christian business?

Why would I care?

Homosexuality may or may not be genetic- but we know religion is a lifestyle choice.

Yep. I fully support your right to put up a "No Christians Allowed" sign on a business you own.

Or do you just limit your personal boycotts to businesses that are racist, but not any other kind of bigotry?

Racism is predicated on falsehood. A persons skin has no impact on their character.

Choice of religion does, as you yourself noted.

 

[koshergrl]

just another reason to keep your business under the table away from the governments long arm. memo to gay men and women freedom is for all.

Yup.

And remember..the MAJORITY is behind you...we will buy your products if you take a stand.

Report Chick-fil-A tops KFC again in annual sales - Atlanta Business Chronicle

 

[koshergrl]

Oh, I appreciate your admission that you are okay with returning to the dark days of WHITE ONLY signs, and for being okay with STRAIGHTS ONLY signs on businesses.

I support civil rights - you do not.

Whom one person trades with is none of my business. I am not a slave owner who has the authority to dictate to others whom they may trade with. Now you clearly view others as your property, bound to obey you as master.

I will not trade with a business that has a whites only policy - but that business does not belong to me - nor does the owner. My only legitimate method of showing displeasure is not to trade.

You don't grasp this because you are a leftist and hostile to civil liberty.

It's just too bad that the other bigots on this forum are not as brave to admit it. SassyIrishLass and koshergrl have fought tooth and nail to deny that STRAIGHTS ONLY florists and bakeries are the same bullshit, different decade.

They put me on Ignore rather than find the guts to admit it. It scares them to admit they are just like the racists of the past.

Supporting civil rights is not bigotry. Demagoguery is not legitimate discussion. But you are a leftist - one cannot expect you to be rational.

Again, state and local public accommodations laws are predicated on Commerce Clause jurisprudence, where the Constitution authorizes government to enact regulatory measures to safeguard the markets; to allow businesses to discriminate based on race, religion, or sexual orientation causes instability in the local market and all other interrelated markets (see, e. g., Wickard v. Filburn, Heart of Atlanta Motel v. US.) Public accommodations laws are a facet of modern economic regulatory policy, policy that is necessary, proper, and Constitutional.

Consequently, public accommodations laws in no way 'violate' a business owner's civil rights or religious liberty, just as requiring safe working conditions or paying a minimum wage in no way 'violates' a business owner's rights.

Opposing public accommodations laws is not 'supporting' civil rights, and ignoring the Commerce Clause jurisprudence that authorizes such laws is utterly irrational.

I wonder if you know how like a jailhouse lawyer you sound.

And in case you're wondering, that's NOT a good thing, lol.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I didnt call you queer.

Of course you did - now you lie about it because you realize what a retard it exposes you to be.

I asked when were you going to make your choice on your gayness. Is this like the "we only speak English" = "No Mexicans" claim you made?

Simple logic?

Yes Asslips, it is.

 

[g5000]

just another reason to keep your business under the table away from the governments long arm. memo to gay men and women freedom is for all.

Yup.

And remember..the MAJORITY is behind you...we will buy your products if you take a stand.

Report Chick-fil-A tops KFC again in annual sales - Atlanta Business Chronicle

Now show us their sales didn't start topping KFC until they came out against gays.

 

[Uncensored2008]

My, my, my, you sure have gotten yourself confused. Nazi Germany was all about Whites Only. No homosexuals allowed either, meine kleine Führer.
.

Jake, you grasp that Jews are white, right?

Herman Goering was openly homosexual.

Hey, you might be a bigot - but you're extremely ignorant, so that makes up for it.

 

[g5000]

So much for koshergrl's theory.

 

[g5000]

My, my, my, you sure have gotten yourself confused. Nazi Germany was all about Whites Only. No homosexuals allowed either, meine kleine Führer.
.

Jake, you grasp that Jews are white, right?

Hey, Tard, you grasp that in Hitler's Germany, Jews were a non-Aryan race, right? Only the whitest of white for Hitler.

Herman Goering was openly homosexual.

You do know where the pink triangle symbol comes from, right, Tard?

 

[koshergrl]

My, my, my, you sure have gotten yourself confused. Nazi Germany was all about Whites Only. No homosexuals allowed either, meine kleine Führer.
.

Jake, you grasp that Jews are white, right?

Herman Goering was openly homosexual.

Hey, you might be a bigot - but you're extremely ignorant, so that makes up for it.

And a compulsive liar.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Even tho what that business did, reject you based on your religion, is illegal? You wouldn't stand up for your faith and the 1st Amendment?

You have no backbone. No wonder you cannot understand people who have one.

Shortbus, you are a leftist and thus have never read the 1st Amendment. The Constitution on leftists is like salt on slugs. But the 1st actually protects a business owner who refuses to do business with another based on religious principle.

A Mosque is not obligated by law to hire a Rabbi, and can refuse to hire Christians or Hindus. It's called "freedom of religion." You should at least know what it is you seek to revoke.

 

[g5000]

My, my, my, you sure have gotten yourself confused. Nazi Germany was all about Whites Only. No homosexuals allowed either, meine kleine Führer.
.

Jake, you grasp that Jews are white, right?

Herman Goering was openly homosexual.

Hey, you might be a bigot - but you're extremely ignorant, so that makes up for it.

And a compulsive liar.

Ipse dixit.

 

[Asclepias]

I didnt call you queer.

Of course you did - now you lie about it because you realize what a retard it exposes you to be.

I asked when were you going to make your choice on your gayness. Is this like the "we only speak English" = "No Mexicans" claim you made?

Simple logic?

Yes Asslips, it is.

Where did I call you queer? Your claim is not sufficent. Lets see a quote.
PS
I know your are trying to deflect.

 

[Asclepias]

Even tho what that business did, reject you based on your religion, is illegal? You wouldn't stand up for your faith and the 1st Amendment?

You have no backbone. No wonder you cannot understand people who have one.

Shortbus, you are a leftist and thus have never read the 1st Amendment. The Constitution on leftists is like salt on slugs. But the 1st actually protects a business owner who refuses to do business with another based on religious principle.

A Mosque is not obligated by law to hire a Rabbi, and can refuse to hire Christians or Hindus. It's called "freedom of religion." You should at least know what it is you seek to revoke.

Thats interesting. Where does it say it protects a business owner?

 

[koshergrl]

Even tho what that business did, reject you based on your religion, is illegal? You wouldn't stand up for your faith and the 1st Amendment?

You have no backbone. No wonder you cannot understand people who have one.

Shortbus, you are a leftist and thus have never read the 1st Amendment. The Constitution on leftists is like salt on slugs. But the 1st actually protects a business owner who refuses to do business with another based on religious principle.

A Mosque is not obligated by law to hire a Rabbi, and can refuse to hire Christians or Hindus. It's called "freedom of religion." You should at least know what it is you seek to revoke.

Thats interesting. Where does it say it protects a business owner?

You can't penalize a business owner for refusing to take part in sacrilegious ceremonies. Particularly when they are specifically targeted because the homos KNOW they view participation as sacrilege.

 

[Iceweasel]

If we're going to have a functioning, successful society, people with one set of values and beliefs and values should not seek to persecute people who have different values and beliefs.

I agree, those businesses should stop persecuting them gays.

Hurting someone's feelings isn't persecuting them. You don't even know what the word means. We're talking about gays going somewhere else, not being strung from trees.

There's been many times I realized a business didn't want my money. I just left, I didn't get a puckered anus and look for a lawyer.

 

[g5000]

As for homophobic Nazis liking to suck a little dick, that is probably only surprising to other homophobes. It does not surprise the rest of us in the slightest.

But back to the point, Whites Only and No Fags Allowed was big in Nazi Germany.

 

[Asclepias]

Even tho what that business did, reject you based on your religion, is illegal? You wouldn't stand up for your faith and the 1st Amendment?

You have no backbone. No wonder you cannot understand people who have one.

Shortbus, you are a leftist and thus have never read the 1st Amendment. The Constitution on leftists is like salt on slugs. But the 1st actually protects a business owner who refuses to do business with another based on religious principle.

A Mosque is not obligated by law to hire a Rabbi, and can refuse to hire Christians or Hindus. It's called "freedom of religion." You should at least know what it is you seek to revoke.

Thats interesting. Where does it say it protects a business owner?

You can't penalize a business owner for refusing to take part in sacrilegious ceremonies. Particularly when they are specifically targeted because the homos KNOW they view participation as sacrilege.

I didnt ask your opinion. I asked where it specifies protection of a business owner?

 

[koshergrl]

If we're going to have a functioning, successful society, people with one set of values and beliefs and values should not seek to persecute people who have different values and beliefs.

I agree, those businesses should stop persecuting them gays.

Hurting someone feelings isn't persecuting them. You don't even know what the word means. We're talking about gays going somewhere else, not being strung from trees.

There's been many times I realized a business didn't want my money. I just left, I didn't get a puckered anus and look for a lawyer.

These fags are deliberately seeking out businesses where they know the owners are religious Christians, and they are targeting them.

 

[mikegriffith1]

A gay couple's desire to force a Christian florist to service their wedding should not take precedence over the Christian florist's constitutional rights of freedom of religion, freedom of association, and private property.

Where in the world do gay get off thinking they have some kind of "right" to force religious business people to service their ceremonies against their will?

Because Washington State laws says that business's are required to do business with customers regardless of race, creed, gender, and other things, including sexual identity.

Where do gays get off thinking that they should be protected by the law like Christians are? Where indeed.

One, the law should not include "sexual identity." The founding fathers would have scoffed at the idea that any government could force religious business owners to service homosexuals against their will. I know you couldn't care less about the framers, but I just thought I'd mention that fact.

Two, why oh why oh why would anyone want to force someone to attend, much less service, their wedding against their will? Decent, respectful, tolerant people don't do that to others, even if they thoroughly disagree with their reasons for not wanting to attend. That's just common courtesy and tolerance for the beliefs of others.

 

[koshergrl]

Even tho what that business did, reject you based on your religion, is illegal? You wouldn't stand up for your faith and the 1st Amendment?

You have no backbone. No wonder you cannot understand people who have one.

Shortbus, you are a leftist and thus have never read the 1st Amendment. The Constitution on leftists is like salt on slugs. But the 1st actually protects a business owner who refuses to do business with another based on religious principle.

A Mosque is not obligated by law to hire a Rabbi, and can refuse to hire Christians or Hindus. It's called "freedom of religion." You should at least know what it is you seek to revoke.

Thats interesting. Where does it say it protects a business owner?

You can't penalize a business owner for refusing to take part in sacrilegious ceremonies. Particularly when they are specifically targeted because the homos KNOW they view participation as sacrilege.

I didnt ask your opinion. I asked where it specifies protection of a business owner?

I didn't give you an opinion. I stated a fact, loser.